The REMEDEE trial: a randomized comparison of a combination sirolimus-eluting endothelial progenitor cell capture stent with a paclitaxel-eluting stent.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare the efficacy and safety results after coronary implantation of a combined sirolimus-eluting CD34 antibody coated Combo stent (OrbusNeich Medical, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida) with the paclitaxel-eluting Taxus Liberté stent (PES) (Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts). This report summarizes the first-in-man randomized, controlled multicenter REMEDEE trial (Randomized study to Evaluate the safety and effectiveness of an abluMinal sirolimus coatED bio-Engineered StEnt) angiographic, intravascular ultrasound, and clinical results up to 12 months. BACKGROUND: Drug-eluting stents have limited restenosis and reintervention but are complicated by especially late and very late stent thrombosis and accelerated neoatherosclerosis. Alternative or adjunct technologies should address these limitations. METHODS: One hundred eighty-three patients with de novo native coronary artery stenoses were randomized 2:1 to Combo stent or PES implantation. The primary endpoint is the angiographic in-stent late lumen loss at 9 months, which was tested for noninferiority between the 2 stent groups. Secondary endpoints include the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events. RESULTS: The Combo stent was found to be noninferior to the PES in 9-month angiographic in-stent late lumen loss with 0.39 ± 0.45 mm versus 0.44 ± 0.56 mm (pnoninferiority = 0.0012). At 12 months, the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events was 8.9% in the Combo group and 10.2% in the PES group (p = 0.80) with no difference in mortality, occurrence of myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization. No stent thrombosis was reported in either group. CONCLUSIONS: In the REMEDEE trial the Combo stent has shown to be effective by meeting the primary noninferiority angiographic endpoint and safe, with an overall low rate of clinical events in both stent groups, including no stent thrombosis up to 12 months.

Apixaban in patients with atrial fibrillation

Background Vitamin K antagonists have been shown to prevent stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation. However, many patients are not suitable candidates for or are unwilling to receive vitamin K antagonist therapy, and these patients have a high risk of stroke. Apixaban, a novel factor Xa inhibitor, may be an alternative treatment for such patients.Methods In a double-blind study, we randomly assigned 5599 patients with atrial fibrillation who were at increased risk for stroke and for whom vitamin K antagonist therapy was unsuitable to receive apixaban (at a dose of 5 mg twice daily) or aspirin (81 to 324 mgper day), to determine whether apixaban was superior. The mean follow up period was 1.1 years. The primary outcome was the occurrence of stroke or systemic embolism.Results Before enrollment, 40% of the patients had used a vitamin K antagonist. The data and safety monitoring board recommended early termination of the study because of a clear benefit in favor of apixaban. There were 51 primary outcome events (1.6% per year) among patients assigned to apixaban and 113 (3.7% per year) among those assigned to aspirin (hazard ratio with apixaban, 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI],0.32 to 0.62; P<0.001). The rates of death were 3.5% per year in the apixaban group and 4.4% per year in the aspirin group (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.02; P = 0.07).There were 44 cases of major bleeding (1.4% per year) in the apixaban group and 39 (1.2% per year) in the aspirin group (hazard ratio with apixaban, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.75; P = 0.57); there were 11 cases of intracranial bleeding with apixaban and 13 with aspirin. The risk of a first hospitalization for cardiovascular causes was reduced with apixaban as compared with aspirin (12.6% per year vs. 15.9% per year, P<0.001). The treatment effects were consistent among important subgroups...